I mean, that is what the us have done since Korea to some degree. Its not like they "won" Afghanistan or Iraq or Vietnam or really any not war wars.

This sounds like the same sort of cope you hear about russia "not yet sending the real troops yet". I mean, this is the full might of the us military. They can't even put boots on the ground (they would get chewed up), have run out of a lot of munitions, lost all bases anywhere near by and are failing to even properly supply and rotate out the naval forces in theater. Out side of glassing the middle east what do you expect them to do? Build escort ships? The us can't wage conventional war worth shit anymore.

I, an absolutely under-informed commenter, tend to agree. My impression is that the U.S. military is a pretty fearsome beast whose specific civilian leaders at the moment are witless, corrupt fools. If competent leadership were interested in the results this administration said they would get, it could presumably be done. Or at least something roughly approximating it.

But it shouldn't even be close for the money we've spent. Bush's little adventure cost $15T.

So aside from nukes, the US can't bring it's full might to bear against Iran. Even ignoring all the damage Iran has done to bases in the region the US simply can't project it's military like it used to. The logistics and supply systems have been hollowed and enshitified as fodder for capital. And now big tech is practically stripping the last of the copper wire out.

Frankly, it had to be very bad to get these guys to go as far as "non-concur" in writing at all.

Hegseth is literally unqualified to manage a large bureaucracy of any kind, evil or not, much less one with bombs and guns. I am guessing that it's a day-to-day operational shit-show, on top of being the same type of moral and long-term-strategy shit-show that Iraq was.

Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan were done "properly." Half the generals quit because the iraq invasion violated all precepts and doctrines of invasions. What is the ratio, 50 troops for every 1,000 civilians in a hostile population? The US went in with way less.

Don't take my word for it, you can read EVERY single Inspector General Report on those wars where the inspector castigates our leadership in progressively certain terms.

I do get your point, these clowns are even less capable. But let's not pretend the bush clows were. They were the worst administration to that date in time.

I wouldn't mind if they ran themselves into the ground a little faster

Well, like you said, that only matters if you want your military to actually be good

If you replace all of those people with cult members, your military will collapse, or become something that the rest of the government can't actually control

Or both.

Sweet summer child...

He will rebuild it all in his own image(of course), then someone will ask Canada to go burn down the white house again, and there will be a Terry Fox Torch bearing marathon to welcome the Canadians to complete the mission by all the Americans that understand the absolute blight that is this administration.

Then I'll wake up and it will all have been a pleasant dream